Defending the Truth

Hmmm, good drivers currently pay premiums that subsidize bad drivers. That is not socialism, but the way actuarial science is applied to risk insurance. Enlarging the risk pool and collecting more premiums minimizes overall risk. You might argue that more people means more claims. This is probably true, but then more people can be treated sooner for serious medical conditions before their condition erupts into an expensive life threatening event. Expensive medical care now provided by emergency rooms for people without insurance could be provided to these individuals by an appropriate GP or clinic. Just think how nice a trip to the ER that does not involve hours of waiting in a queue loaded with people suffering only from a cold.

You may have great medical benefits now, but what about five years from now? What if you were to loose them?

this is something I wonder about. why for four years of service do we pay benefits for the rest of someone's life? while I thank people for their service how does four years equate to 60? that is something that ought to change or else it it just another form of welfare.

Especially if the illness was not caused by the service itself.

To me, if a service man is injured, well, it's just like workman's comp. He SHOULD be taken care of.

But if he gets ill, through no fault of the military, why should taxpayers have to pay for it? He should get private insurance and shut up about it.

Isn't it interesting that fxashun doesn't want his benefits to change, but his 'benefits' are paid for by the US Government? He doesn't want anyone else to get what he's getting? WTF!?!?!

Forget Canada, check out others!
Category:Healthcare by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

First of all dear observer you really need to get past your rabid antipathy to socialism. TO oppose healthcare for all simply because of an incorrect understanding of socialism and its effects is a bad idea.

I would point to the scandinavian socialist model. The scandinavian nations are better functioning and more representative DEMOCRACIES than the US ( though they don't need to constantly claim it). The average scandinavian is better educated, more politically aware and more involved than the average american. The scandinavian model is more INCLUSIVE than the american ( not every politician has millions of campaign dollars or a personal fortune to spend - which your democracy unfortunately requires). Every law, every state organ and every policy decision is based on the decisions of the elected representatives of the PEOPLE ( which is DEMOCRACY ). Politics are NUANCED instead of the black & white , Republican/Democrat schism of american politics. Scandinavian politics are more representative of the average citizen's needs and wishes than the "W.A.S.P. led politics of America ( doesn't it surprise you that in spite of being such a ethinically mixed nation, almost all your lawmakers are rich white men and women - VERY representative).

The scandinavians have implemented the principles of democracy more accurately than the US. And this in spite of being socialist democratic MONARCHIES.

YOu rile about having to pay for the healthcare of a lazy unambitious parasitic bum. Now i personally think that you are selling your own people short. YOu make it sound like everybody who ISN'T healthy and can't afford to be DESERVES it. That would of course be a complete fallacy. Because the majority that NEED universal healthcare plan are NOT parasitic bums. They are hardworking americans just like yourself who may have chosen the wrong insurance plan. They may be working two jobs and not be able to afford insurance ( single urban mothers ). They may have been laid off as a result of offshore outsourcing ( which means fat pockets for the already rich, while average joe gets a gold watch and a "fuck off" note). In fact there are INNUMERABLE reasons why an honest hardworking american could use universal healthcare. To claim that they are all lazy bums just means that your nation has more than its fair share of lazy bums. It is an unfair generalization ( smacks of republican propoganda ) that only shows your fellow citizens in a very poor light.

Consider this; Denmark has 100% free healthcare and education. Providing this to the citizens costs a bundle. As a result, as a danish citizen i am obliged to pay 50% in tax. Of course EVERYBODY bitches about paying taxes ( a universal complaint ) but that would occur whether the tax burden was 5% or 50%.

Yet let's look at the advantages. Denmark has 100% literacy. It has a MUCH HIGHER proportion of citizens with a higher education degree. It has a MUCH LOWER infant mortality rate than the US, it has MANY FEWER deaths caused by lack of care, and all in all it has a much healthier population.

This translates into other benefits for average joe. The population is more EFFECTIVE. there is less unemployment. There is less crime. There is less violence. There is less desperation ( you don't need to be rich to survive - you only have to be a citizen, unlike the US of A). The money in the medical industry goes to facilities and medical practitioners instead of salaries and profits for insurance salemen and insurance companies ( it's ridiculous to WASTE money on providing PROFIT to insurance companies and and EVEN GREATER waste to pay a guy to sell a BASIC HUMAN RIGHT to your citizens.

My mother and father have both had major surgery in denmark ( mom had cancer and dad had open heart surgery ). Both were given the BEST care instead of the most cost beneficial care (neither got shipped off to India by their HMO). Both were given post surgery care including psychotherapy, GREATLY improving my family's ability to function after the trauma of these life threatening diseases. As a result both were able to return to the job market quicker, and both are back to being ASSETS to the country instead of liabilities ( as opposed to being DEAD, which they may have been because of "lacking coverage").

It is a complete fallacy to say that government "cradle to the grave" support leads to laziness. Denmark is a (proportionally) richer country than the US. It has more people involved in the job market. IT has a higher literacy rate. It has better facilities for the citizens. It has a more socially responsible and aware society. It has a society that TRUSTS its democratically elected respresentatives ( i have yet to hear of an american that believes politicians are not thieves and government is not out screw you). It has a greater spectrum of people involved in politics and governance (and therefore more representative). It is more concerned with the wellbeing of the average citizen than the bottom line of the rich. It puts individual liberty and life opportunities for EVERYONE ABOVE profitability. It is not a nation divided into the Have and Have-Nots, but rather the Have and Have-Mores.

Socialism DOES NOT MEAN THE SOVIET UNION. Socialism is a concept which means that EVERY citizen is in part responsible for the wellbeing of his FELLOW CITIZEN ( i thought the bible taught you that). This RESPONSIBILITY is met by paying taxes so that your TRULY REPRESENTATIVE and SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE government can take of your citizens.

IT does NOT mean mind control and it does not mean stifling of opposing opinions. I have NO DOUBT that the US has a greater element of mind control and an infinitely more invasive and "opposition stifling" in its governance. I mean heck the danish government doesn't even have the right to outlaw any group or deny them the right to assemble ( we still have the occasional neo-nazi demonstration - usually condemned and ridiculed by civil society, but that's another story). Think about it dude... how can a nation which as the "Patriot" Act be considered free of mind control and censure? THe patriot act makes the US more akin to Stalinist Russia than any socialist state in the world ( save china and North korea that are still more or less stalinist - an UNSUPPORTED by other socialist regimes btw)

It matter not to me whether you love or hate socialism. But i CAN tell you that your understanding of socialism and its effects is plain wrong. Socialism is the MOST INCLUSIVE, the MOST HUMANE, the MOST JUST, the MOST EQUAL and the MOST BENEFICIAL governmental principle for wider population.

As opposed to the rich and infulential whities - they don't like socialism AT ALL because they'll make less money. NOTE: It is not that your nation will become poorer ( it cannot when you have a healthier, more educated population), but rather the nations wealth will benefit EVERYBODY as opposed to the top 5%.

I cannot believe that you are not embarrassed by the fact that IN SPITE of being the richest and most powerful nation in the world you seem to be unable to *ahem* "afford" to keep all your citizens healthy. Truly tragic.

{standing and applauding}

Well said, hkb, well said.

I find it difficult to compare our healthcare situation to that country. With a population of less than 6 million, we have more illegal aliens than they have citizens. Not really an apple to apple comparison.